Nope. I can be very sensitive to the needs of others. Had this passenger politely said "Excuse me, I really hate to bother you, but I have a sensitivity and allergy to nut products; would it trouble you to refrain from eating them on this flight"?, then there is absolutely no problem.

But the "Special Snowflake Syndrome" that I referred to where someone makes a demand that their issue be immediately accommodated above everyone else's needs - well that gets met by a huge dose of "insensitivis". Seat poaching without asking can be classified in the same bucket.

Are you saying that just because someone acts in a way that doesn't meet your expectations of civility that you would do something that could threaten their life? These allergies are real and are not something that you or anyone else should treat so cavalierly.

Well to be clear, this NRSA FA potentially endangered her own life with her actions. She knowingly took a job where one of the duties is to regularly come into contact with nuts and/or nut products when they are served to customers on a daily basis (including VERY HIGH potential for residual exposure from past flights). Then she hopped onto a plane without discussing this with anyone in advance, did not carry an epipen, and did not apparently care enough to even think about any of this in advance. She also put her employer at risk with her actions.

Then, she decided that she would make a big stink and impose her problem onto a completely innocent person.

No, I would not endanger her. I'd grit my teeth and bear it like the OP. But I'd also call her out on her blatant stupidity and selfishness to even act in such an idiotic manner.

I missed the part where the OP stayed she had disclosed that she carried no epipen or other adrenaline injectable. Was it exited out?

The key issue here, is the status of said passenger. If it was a paying passenger, this would be a legitimate argument about eating nuts vs inconveniencing someone nearby, but as we're dealing with a nonrev who should not even be speaking with a customer let alone making demands of them, the nonrev should have excused themselves to another part of the cabin until after the meal service without making a sound to the customer.

And also I expect the person with the problem make their imposition on others as minimal as practical. Don't ask for special accommodations if you can reasonably avoid doing so.

Man, can't tell if this is sarcastic or real...Poe's Law?

I'm hoping for the sake of FT humanity it is sarcastic.

No, it's not sarcastic. Nonrevs are told, by policy, to be invisible. That means not disturbing paying customers, not asking them to change seats or for other favors, they must give up a meal choice or even their entire meal for a paying customer if asked, and they certainly should not be asking a customer to stop eating a portion of their meal due to an allergy.

There is no excuse for what this nonrev did - they should have silently moved away and stayed out of view during the meal service if they had an allergy issue....and I say this as a former nonrev myself....I cannot fathom under what circumstances this behavior was acceptable, and most employees know this. I knew the rules and the result of violating them, and was always extra careful with everything from my attire to any interaction with a paying customer.

To illustrate, I was on a NRT-EWR flight a couple months back where a nonrev was boarded into BF with her two children. They were split up, but at least the nonrev had the sense not to ask other passengers to change seats. Another passenger insisted, without being asked, on trading seats so the nonrev mother could sit near her kids, but the purser went absolutely ballistic in the forward galley thinking the nonrev had requested the change because that would have violated policy.

First, I agree that you as the paying customer deserved priority over a non-rev.
She could have easily solved the problem by moving to coach.

Second, the "aerosol" threat from nuts has been wildly exaggerated.
See here:

https://www.aaaai.org/ask-the-expert...e-nut-allergen

https://web.archive.org/web/20090407...81213_Nuts.pdf

Most documented cases of an aerosol threat are from cooking and volatilizing the nut oils containing the offending proteins. Studies involving micro-milling and aerosolizing nut powder have shown a very low antagonistic response rate with normal circulating air environments.

LOL!

I've done that. Some special snowflake decided that it was appropriate to let her dog out of its cage. I was reseated a few rows forward but still spent most of the flight sneezing :(

Interestingly, as I was laying in bed recovering from my alcohol allergy, on the BBC radio this morning was this story:

'Cleaner world' increases allergy hospital admissions by 33% in five years

This person with the nut allergy was a human FIRST, a passenger SECOND, and a flight attendant THIRD.

If the first two do not motivate you to forgo your own nuts because of the allergy, I got nothin' for ya.

I guess the fact that you saw her ONLY as the 3rd inspired you to run to flyer talk to rat her out.

By your logic, handicapped passengers should be allowed to take First Class seats from paid-F passengers because they're "human FIRST". See here:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...passenger.html

I guess you would advocate this modification to UA's boarding instructions:

"Please select your seat as you board according to your needs or desires".

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." -Karl Marx

This is a funny thread. I'd hate to see how you all would react on Southwest. All it takes is one allergy onboard a WN flight for the FAs to not serve peanuts to anyone ON THE ENTIRE PLANE.